To go or not to go? Wedding question

  • Thread starter Thread starter Footprints
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I think by not attending the wedding you are missing a great opportunity to later evangelize and help her return to the Church. If you give her the true reason for not attending, don’t be surprised if your relationship ends.
 
Legend said:
Which brings up the fact…or question…isn’t it a sin to lie???
Click to expand...
I don’t think you need to give a reason for not attending unless the bride or groom is a close relative/friend, which does not seem like the case here.
 
I’m just going to say I’m unable to go. That’s the truth. I don’t have to give every detail.
 
Well, if the OP is being asked to take part in the sins, that is a very different sort of wedding than any I have attended! 😲
 
Perhaps being asked to stand up for the Catholic person, pay for the wedding, etc.

Personally I think it would be a very difficult decision to make.
 
Gertabelle said:
May I ask you again, please, if there is such a definitive statement on attending marriages which cannot be presumed to be valid?
Click to expand...
The closest I can find is in one of the print editions of the Baltimore Catechism. I’ll just cut and paste what I posted in two recent threads:

In one of the old Baltimore Catechism print versions (I could not find a link to the version online), it stated that regarding Catholics married by protestant pastors, Catholics could not attend the wedding nor should they give gifts to the couple. If we see the reasoning behind that as those weddings being invalid (perhaps because they involved a person or two people who were divorced and thus ineligible to marry in the Catholic Church, so they would have to go the non-Catholic route), then we can extrapolate from that source that the answer is a clear and resounding “NO!”. Additionally, according to CCC 1868, we share in the sin of others when we do anything to show approval of their actions (not an exact quote, but that is the sense that the CCC 1868 was trying to convey; also see sections regarding scandal).
 
Norseman82 said:
40.png
Gertabelle:
May I ask you again, please, if there is such a definitive statement on attending marriages which cannot be presumed to be valid?
Click to expand...
The closest I can find is in one of the print editions of the Baltimore Catechism. I’ll just cut and paste what I posted in two recent threads:

In one of the old Baltimore Catechism print versions (I could not find a link to the version online), it stated that regarding Catholics married by protestant pastors, Catholics could not attend the wedding nor should they give gifts to the couple. If we see the reasoning behind that as those weddings being invalid (perhaps because they involved a person or two people who were divorced and thus ineligible to marry in the Catholic Church, so they would have to go the non-Catholic route), then we can extrapolate from that source that the answer is a clear and resounding “NO!”. Additionally, according to CCC 1868, we share in the sin of others when we do anything to show approval of their actions (not an exact quote, but that is the sense that the CCC 1868 was trying to convey; also see sections regarding scandal).
Click to expand...
Thank you for replying to my question. I’ll prayerfully look those things over. You’re a blessing to me today, as this is exactly what I need to be holding in my heart this Saturday morning.
 
In looking these things over, keep in mind that the Baltimore Catechism contains many statements that are more harsh about Catholic involvement with non-Catholics than what the Church espouses today. As I posted earlier, my mother back in the 1940s was not allowed to attend a wedding of her friend who had left the Church, under pain of sin, probably under that Baltimore Catechism rule. Under the Baltimore Catechism, I myself would probably not even have been allowed to be married in the church building.

It is fine if one’s individual conscience today causes one to avoid attending an invalid wedding, but it’s important to recognize that it’s individual conscience motivating that, after a prayerful consideration of all the circumstances involved, such as your relationship/ closeness to the person, how you are being asked to participate (guest vs membet of wedding party or pay for wedding), and whether you think your attendance or lack thereof might motivate someone to return to the Church eventually. The Baltimore Catechism is not binding on us.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for clarifying that. My comment above about prayerful consideration has to do with my attachment to sin, and my continued consideration of how I deal with my own sinful tendencies and the sins of others. I’m not thinking about whether I should attend weddings, but more how I demonstrate compassion and strength of conviction, bringing the incomparable love of God to those who are suffering from the sinful nature of all of us – or how I don’t do that.

I have no intention of unilaterally condemning those who are outside of Catholicism or who have left the Church for whatever reason. I myself left the Church for 14 years, and those who loved me in spite of my choices helped win me back to the Church. Thank God for their prayers, their example, and their lack of open condemnation of my choices – that would’ve ended our relationships and any influence they might have had.

Anywhooo, on with the day. 🙂
 
Gertabelle said:
I’m not thinking about whether I should attend weddings, but more how I demonstrate compassion and strength of conviction, bringing the incomparable love of God to those who are suffering from the sinful nature of all of us – or how I don’t do that.
Click to expand...
If everybody truly approached the question in this way, it would be a better world regardless of whether they did or didn’t go to a particular wedding, and we can be sure that some would decide to go and some would decide not to go, and that would be okay either way. 💟
 
Last edited:
Not only that, there are many cases where we can’t be certain whether the marriage is valid or not. I’m the only Catholic in my family. Protestants aren’t bound by Church law. When my grandfather remarried, I attended (as a minor with my parents at the time)… his church acknowledged the second marriage. Whether it was valid would depend on whether his first marriage to my grandmother was valid…and how the heck am I suppose to judge that?
 
Thanks for this!

I definitely don’t think that our relationship will be affected since we actually barely know each other. I’ve done 3 shows with her (two as a fairly young kid) and she went to school with my brother. I was shocked I was even asked to attend.
I also don’t really think that my lack of attendance will affect her return to the Church. I’m from a more traditional, conservative family and I’m also still a teen. I again, barely know her, and I don’t even know if she remembers or knows I’m Catholic? I do pray for her though and I’ll especially do so on her wedding day.
I had already RSVP’d a “no” to her and she said no worries. I think it’s a super casual thing and hopefully I’ll be able to perhaps be in contact with her some other times to talk or maybe do another show together.
 
That’s all fine. My response wasn’t really directed to you as you had posted you already thought about this and decided to politely decline, which is perfectly fine to do, especially since she’s not a member of your immediate family and there’s not going to be bad feelings over your annual family holiday dinner because Brother wouldn’t attend Sister’s wedding.

I posted mostly because there are people on the forum who insist that the Baltimore Catechism continues to govern everything we do. While I find much of the Baltimore Catechism that deals with Catholic doctrine to be helpful, it is not the official catechism of the Church and like I said parts of it are very harsh towards non-Catholic religion. Some people who read here are fairly new to Catholicism or are not well catechized, so I try to clarify this whenever the Baltimore Catechism comes up.

It is fine however to prayerfully consult the Baltimore Catechism along with the current catechism, as Gertabelle said she was doing. If there is a substantive difference between the two, then the current official catechism should govern.
 
Last edited:
I studied the Baltimore Catechism for several years through my homeschooling program. It really was pretty intense to me, especially the 3rd volume. It is good but as you said, it isn’t the official Catechism.
 
I find the basic answers in the beginning to be extremely helpful. My mother must have quoted the “Why did God make me?” and answer to me about 100 times when she was alive. There are times when life just seems meaningless and one has to remind oneself that God made us to love and serve Him, which we can find some way to do regardless of what other garbage is going on in our life on earth at any given time.
 
It is a great honor to be invited to participate or witness a wedding. I realize you have declined the invitation, but just know for the future that an invitation to a wedding means you are held in great esteem by the bride or groom.
 
Everyone: be careful in thinking that because the Baltimore Catechism is pre-Vatican 2, it must be thrown out:
  1. Contrary to popular opinion, Vatican 2 did NOT change everything! Vatican 2 did not eliminate the ten commandments or the seven sacraments, nor did it change the fact that the sun rises in the east and sets in the west. The penalty for mortal sin is still loss of heaven. And Vatican 2 is NOT responsible for instituting the NHL’s hybrid icing rule. The whole “But Vatican 2 changed all that!” mentality can be used to justify anything and can result in chaos.
  2. Although the Baltimore Catechism may not reflect all the Vatican 2 changes that actually did happen, it did give definitive answers to many questions that are not specifically answered in the current catechism. So, unless we know for a fact that the Church did change the teaching / rules on something in the Baltimore Catechism (for example, the universal rules on Friday abstinence from meat under pain of mortal sin or the length of time for Eucharistic fast), it still can be considered a valid reference.
 
Last edited:
I went to two different Masses for Sunday obligation this weekend (one was a special anniversary Mass for a parish I am in part-time, celebrated by Archbishop Chaput) and at both of them, the homily, which revolved around the gospel about Jesus’ response to the man casting out demons in his name who wasn’t an apostle, specifically discussed in detail how, although Catholicism is the one true holy and apostolic Church, the Protestant churches are following Jesus and even some of the other non-Catholic churches such as the Jewish faith are also following God and we can learn things from them and we should be on friendly terms with them.

Archbishop Chaput went into detail explaining how in previous eras of US history, the Catholics and Protestants did not get along and Catholics were taught to distance themselves from Protestants, but that was no longer the case.

Having heard this discussion twice this weekend from the pulpit, once from my diocesan Archbishop, I think I am on quite firm ground in saying that the Baltimore Catechism sections that are harsh on Catholic-Protestant and Catholic-Jewish relations can safely be “thrown out” in favor of the new Catechism teaching.
 
Last edited:
Tis_Bearself said:
I went to two different Masses for Sunday obligation this weekend (one was a special anniversary Mass for a parish I am in part-time, celebrated by Archbishop Chaput) and at both of them, the homily, which revolved around the gospel about Jesus’ response to the man casting out demons in his name who wasn’t an apostle, specifically discussed in detail how, although Catholicism is the one true holy and apostolic Church, the Protestant churches are following Jesus and even some of the other non-Catholic churches such as the Jewish faith are also following God and we can learn things from them and we should be on friendly terms with them.

Archbishop Chaput went into detail explaining how in previous eras of US history, the Catholics and Protestants did not get along and Catholics were taught to distance themselves from Protestants, but that was no longer the case.

Having heard this discussion twice this weekend from the pulpit, once from my diocesan Archbishop, I think I am on quite firm ground in saying that the Baltimore Catechism sections that are harsh on Catholic-Protestant and Catholic-Jewish relations can safely be “thrown out” in favor of the new Catechism teaching.
Click to expand...
Very shaky logical gymnastics there.

Does not the Church still teach that obeying the marriage laws of the Church are still a precept of the Church? Unless it has been officially repealed/reversed (meaning has the Church specifically said we now can get married to anyone anywhere by anyone and it’s now a free-for-all), then you are taking the Archbishop’s words out of context and so does not apply to this particular issue.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top